mandible angle; a 6cmx3cm bluish bruise on left side of the neck on its lateral side with its end point ending in an area of 3cmx2cm; three bluish bruises 3cmx6cm, 5cmx2cm and 4cmx2cm, respectively, on the outer aspect of left arm; and another 6cmx2cm bluish bruise in the middle of left scapular region. In view of the findings of Chemical Examiner, the Board concluded that cause of death was asphyxia due to throttling. The injuries were ante mortem in nature and would have led to death in natural course of events. Probable time that elapsed between injuries and death was immediate. In cross-examination, he has further clarified that injuries No. 1 and 2 could not be the result of fall on a hard surface. Learned counsel for the appellants have attempted to make a capital out of a statement made by this witness in his cross-examination that cause of death could not be ascertained at the time of autopsy; underlying tissues were healthy, the post mortem report did not have a mention of finger nail marks on the neck of the deceased as also fracture of Larynx, Hypoid, Cartilages and Thyroid bone and that being so throttling being cause of death is ruled out. Learned counsel have also pointed out that opinion, Exhibit PE/1, regarding cause of death of the deceased, is highly suspicious because Dr. Pawan Kumar Sharma (PW8) has revealed that he did not agree with the opinion and, therefore, did not append his signature thereon and that the opinion, even otherwise, is quite vague and uncertain in so far as it does not say that the injuries were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. We, however, regret our inability to subscribe to the view. There was little possibility of the deceased attempting to escape, he being in the control of at least four persons. In such a situation there was no question of the neck
